CHAPTER 2FREEDOM AND CONSCIENCE

FREE WILLY!!

Man’s free will distinguishes him from the rest of creation;-our capacity to reason, understand and discern good from evil, and freely act on these things.

The concept of free will is easily misunderstood: The freedom to do whatever one wants, whenever one

wants == FALSE.

When we take objective truths and consider them subjective, we are in danger of justifying evil behavior.

Relativism: There are no such thing as moral decisions, just options of personal preference.

THE FREEDOM TO DO WHAT ONE OUGHT

Good moral acts lead us to a truer sense of freedom.

Bad moral acts make us slaves to sin.

Staying within the moral law may seem restrictive at first, but this really sets the stage for a greater sense of freedom.

Analogies: English language; getting license; playing piano.

#WHATSAYJESUS

“If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples,

and you will know the truth, and the truth will make

you free.”

“…everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin.”

John 8

FREEDOM IN THE MORAL LIFE

Being a faithful disciple of Christ: -Does not make us less free; rather,

-It gives us greater freedom as it liberates us from the sinfulness that seeks to enslaves us;

-Thereby allowing us to fulfill the purpose for which we were created;

-And to achieve true happiness.

THE THROW DOWN -- GOOD VS EVIL The struggle of good and evil has been the great drama of history.

We recognize it in nearly all great literature, all profound philosophical thought, and by the development of laws.

Socrates called the science of good and evil the most important of all forms of knowledge because it places us on the road to true happiness. His student, Plato, called moral knowledge “the rule of human life.”These guys believed that living virtuously was the whole point of education – the perfection of man.

Living the moral life has also always been a struggle even for the most devout Christian.

THE THROW DOWN -- GOOD VS EVIL

Many of the greatest saints write about dealing with strong temptations to sin.

“Lord, make me chaste…but not yet.”

So what do we do to fight the good fight?Ephesians 6:14-19

Strength comes in prayer, Scripture, and the Sacraments.

What Sacraments are particularly helpful? Reconciliation and the Eucharist.

THE MORAL LIFE…WHY BOTHER?

Motivations for following the moral law:The perfect motivator:

Love of God and neighborThe imperfect motivator:

Fear of God and punishment

While love is a more perfect motivator then fear, both are incentives grounded in a belief in the moral truths revealed by Christ and taught by the Church.

God prefers obedience out of love, but accepts obedience motivated by fear of consequences too.

Usually it’s some combination of the two.

BOTHERING CONTINUEDChristians believe that they are adopted sons or daughters of God who have been redeemed out of love by what Jesus accomplished on the cross.They have decided to live for God and believe that God has set down a moral law – what ought to be done or avoided.

A non-believer also recognizes a moral code that exist as rational moral principles which apply to everyone.

The Natural Law is written on the human heart—part of our nature.

Malum in se – evil in itself. Christian morality entails the whole person as intelligent, free, and thus, responsible for their actions in an authentic human existence.

THE MORAL ACTNot all actions are moral acts. Moral acts are those actions that result from deliberate, free choice between good and evil, or varying degrees of goodness.

Examples of non-moral acts: breathing, walking, yawning: simply physical actions that are not the result of deliberate choice.

A moral act must be (1) premeditated and freely chosen.

It also (2) must involve moral content. Some choices are morally indifferent. Moral acts proceed from decisions between good and evil or different degrees of goodness.

THE MORAL ACTMoral actions are (3) personal – they say something about the person:

Deliberation involves the intellect;And free choice involves the will.

The intellect and will are the two primary faculties of man’s soul;and the soul is reflected in the body.

Since man is comprised of body and soul, moral actions express and determine the goodness or evil of the individual that performs them.

Our morality determines our character!

THE MORAL ACT“For better or worse, moral acts contribute toward forming our character and our virtue…

Moral acts express and influence our dispositions and our free will because our actions, dispositions, and will are interrelated.

Every moral act we commit leaves us either better off or worse, more virtuous or less virtuous, closer to God or further away from God.

It never leaves us exactly the same.” pg 43

Person

Choice

Intellect (Conscience)

Free Will (Chooses virtue/vice)

Moral Act

Character

MORAL RESPONSIBILITYKnowledge and responsibility are

directly related.

Knowledge of act : Responsibility

Knowledge of act : Responsibility

The more/less knowledge one possesses, the more/less morally responsible one is.

GOT GUILT? Number from 1) to 4) – who is most guilty?

And why? 1) being the least guilty, 4) being the most

A) A lawyer who commits perjury B) A lone witness to an auto accident who

injures a victim by accidentally giving improper first aid

C) A two-year-old who takes his brother’s toys D) A medical resident who gives a wrong

prescription after working thirty-six hours straight.

MORAL RESPONSIBILITYWell formed Christians have the greatest responsibility because they have the most knowledge of right and wrong; good and evil.

This doesn’t only apply for culpability of sin --Greater knowledge also increases the virtue of a good action.

Makes sense right? More responsibility usually gets more $$$ in the working world.

What about a lack of knowledge?With ignorance we have to make our

first distinction.

IGNORANCEThere are three forms of ignorance:

Invincible Ignorance: When we do not know something that was

impossible for us to know.

Vincible Ignorance: When we do not know something that we ought to

know.

Concomitant Ignorance: When we do not know something but we would

have done it anyway had we known.

INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

The person makes a decision to act out of ignorance but in good conscience -- having taken every precaution to inform himself.

If fully informed, the person would have not performed the act.

Responsibility is diminished or minimized by lack of knowledge.

Invincible ignorance = Not culpable (or at least minimally culpable)

INVINCIBLE IGNORANCESt. Thomas Aquinas’ example:

A hunter in the woods thinks he is shooting a deer and has taken every precaution to make sure he is making the right decision to shoot. But he shoots and kills a man which he would have not done had he known it was a man and not a deer. The hunter is responsible for the death of another but his responsibility is minimized because he could not have

known it was a man beforehand.

VINCIBLE IGNORANCEThe person makes a decision to act out of ignorance without attempting to find out what the result might be.

Not in good conscience -- not having taken every precaution to be fully informed.

Responsibility is retained because the person could have overcome their ignorance.

Vincible Ignorance = Fully culpable for act

VINCIBLE IGNORANCESt. Thomas Aquinas’ example:

In this case the hunter does not bother trying to find out if the object is a deer or a man and he shoots anyway. In killing the man, the hunter’s responsibility is increased because he could have put in the effort to find out if it was in fact a

deer he was shooting or not. His will was not fully informed, but he did not allow this to alter his decision, therefore, he is more responsible for the killing.

CONCOMITANT IGNORANCE(not in book)The person performs an act out of ignorance but they would not have changed their decision had they been more informed to what they were doing.

Responsibility is retained because the person would have chosen the act fully informed.

Concomitant Ignorance = Fully culpable

CONCOMITANT IGNORANCESt. Thomas Aquinas’ example:

The hunter thinks he is shooting a deer, but shoots and kills his enemy. In this case, the hunter killed out of ignorance but would have still chosen to kill his enemy if he had been informed that it was his enemy.

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY So we see that the only acceptable form of ignorance is invincible ignorance

--one who seeks the truth and follows that truth as best he

understands it –

It is only invincible ignorance that acts in good conscience, fully informed to the extent that is possible.

What do we have the obligation to do if we suspect an action might be wrong, but we’re not 100% sure?

We have the obligation to resolve all doubt by gathering the correct information. We cannot just act and then claim ignorance.

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

“Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance,

inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.”

CCC 1735

see chart

FACTORS THAT LIMIT RESPONSIBILITY

Factor Definition ExampleIgnorance Not knowing something. A person who has

never heard the GospelInadvertence Not noticing something. Speeding because of

not seeing a speed limit sign that lowered the speed limit.

Duress Being put under force. Being forced to drive a get-away car at gunpoint.

Fear Being afraid of something. Lying about cheating for fear of getting expelled.

Habit Acting in an almost involuntary way because of having done the same thing repeatedly.

A new lie told by a pathological liar.

Inordinate attachment

Desire for something that goes beyond reason.

An alcoholic who continues drinking even though he wants to stop.